'We are prepared': DG ISPR touts Pakistan's indigenous military capabilities

Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry is currently addressing a press conference. The deputy chief of naval staff (operations), Rear Admiral Shafaat Ali, and the deputy chief of air staff (projects), Air Vice Marshal, Tariq Ghazi, are also present alongside him.

The press conference comes as the nation commemorates the one-year anniversary of Marka-i-Haq. Last year’s military conflict with India, starting from the April 22 Pahalgam attack to the end of Pakistan’s Operation Bunyanum Marsoos, with a ceasefire ending a military escalation between the two countries on May 10, has been called “Marka-i-Haq” (Battle of Truth) by the state.

“We welcome you to ISPR on this happy day,” he said at the outset of his presser, congratulating the nation on the one-year anniversary of Marka-i-Haq.

He said that the country’s armed forces had risen to the nation’s expectations and defeated a much larger enemy with multi-domain operations.

“Today, we are not going to dwell a lot on what happened … We are going to spend more time from May 2025 to May 2026,” he said, adding that they would expand on the “strategic consequences” of the conflict.

He said that there were 10 strategic consequences of Marka-i-Haq, the first of which was that the Indian narrative of painting Pakistan as a source of terrorism stood buried.

He said that an attempt had been made to portray, without evidence, that Pakistan had perpetrated terrorism in India. He said that it had been one year since the Pahalgam incident, yet the questions that Pakistan had asked remain unanswered.

“Where is the evidence?” he asked. “Nobody buys this … you are the biggest terrorist. Nobody listens to them, nobody believes them,” he said.

He said that the second consequence was the consolidation of Pakistan as the net security stabiliser in the region. He said that Marka-i-Haq showed who was controlling and dominating the escalation, adding that India escalated the conflict based on a lie.

The DG ISPR said the “biggest ambassador of security in the region” was Pakistan and its leadership.

Coming to the third strategic consequence of Marka-i-Haq, he said it was related to “our eastern neighbour, unfortunately”, saying it was the “politicisation of Indian military leadership and militarisation of Indian political leadership.”

“This is what’s happening over there”, he said, adding that India’s military, which used to be professional, had “unfortunately been politicised”.

“You will come across several examples of this,” he added. “You heard their air chief marshal a few months after Marka-i-Haq … [saying] ‘I got to know today that even we downed some planes’ … That is politicisation of the military leadership … Why are you trying to make jokers out of your admirals, and generals and marshal? Don’t do that.”

On the other hand, the DG ISPR continued, “We have placed the facts as they are.”

Moreover, he said, Indian politicians appeared more like “warmongers”, going by their statements. The DG ISPR asserted that the politicisation of the military and militarisation of politics was “dangerous”.

Moving on to the fourth strategic consequence, he said it was the global acknowledgement of India’s efforts to externalise its internal problems and internalise its external problems while using terrorism as a state tool.

He said India’s internal problems included the repression of minorities and Kashmiris. This, he said, “comes from a false sense of entitlement and this hubristic attitude”.

The DG ISPR said India did not want to solve its internal issues, and hence, was externalising them by levelling allegations that Pakistan was behind terrorism in the neighbouring country. He said these issues needed to be addressed “politically and internally”.

“Kashmir is an internationally recognised dispute,” he said. “It’s not your internal problem for you to make demographic changes there … you cannot do that.”

He reiterated the allegations India was backing terrorism in Pakistan, further stating that “they were even behind terrorism in their own country and would then accuse others”.

But, he added, what changed after Marka-i-Haq was that the world recognised how they operated.

He said the fifth consequence was the “exposure of the true face of the Indian media and its discredited information operations”. The DG ISPR also noted that Indian authorities had started “shutting down Pakistani media” during Marka-i-Haq and this practice was still ongoing.

But that did not solve the problem, he said, adding that his advice to India was to speak the truth.

“That’s what Pakistan did … The only thing that can survive in today’s information domain in truth. Tell people the truth. But somehow the Indians think they can work their [way] around lies. It doesn’t work anymore.”

He said the sixth consequence was the “transformed character of warfare”. Elaborating on this, he said this covered multi-domain operations, non-contact warfare, synergy, proxies and information.

The DG ISPR explained that warfare was not limited to borders anymore. “It’s [fought] on land, in the sea, in the air, in cyberspace … and in the minds. It’s cognitive as well.”

He said Pakistan’s armed forces were prepared to fight against India during Marka-i-Haq in all those domains. “We were prepared back then, and we are prepared today as well.”

The seventh consequence, he said, was Pakistan’s proven potential and the resilience to combat multifaceted challenges. The eighth was the loud and clear establishment of deterrence, he said.

“Anyone who thinks there is space for war between two nuclear neighbours is crazy. That is madness. Only a madman can think about. You want to do it, then there should be no doubt about our resolve,” he said.

He said that the ninth consequence was that Pakistan was recognised as a geopolitically significant and responsible middle power. He said that the last, but most important consequence, was the unshakeable synergy between the people, the government and the armed forces, “which we call the Bunyanum Marsoos effect”.

During the press conference, he also presented figures on counterterrorist efforts post-Marka-i-Haq. He said that India was given a “lesson of their life” and they fell back on their default option, which was terrorist proxies.

“We saw a surge in terrorist incidents post-Marka-i-Haq,” he said, showing the figures on the screen. He said that in October, Pakistan struck terrorist support infrastructures in neighbouring Afghanistan. He said that the number of incidents subsequently went down.

He reiterated that terrorism in Pakistan was being carried out by India and Afghanistan was being used as a base of operations.

“You saw who India called after they were taught a lesson in Marka-i-Haq. The Afghan Taliban regime’s so-called foreign minister,” he said.

During his press conference, the DG ISPR also played clips of Indian media, saying, “The field marshal and Pakistan; I think they feature in their dreams day and night. They need to grow up.”

After multiple videos were played, the DG ISPR said they had presented an overview of “what our dear neighbour has been doing” over the past year. He added that he would also go on to detail what Pakistan had been doing during this period.

He recalled that during a press conference on May 11, 2025, he had stated that Pakistan’s military capability seen during Marka-i-Haq was just 10 per cent of the armed forces’ power potential.

“We are prepared; if anyone wishes to test us, they are more than welcome,” he said after a video showing the armed forces’ prowess played on the screen. He added that the clips displayed Pakistan’s indigenous military capabilities. “This is homegrown.”

The military spokesperson highlighted the significance of security in the world today, adding that “one we say that the armed forces, with the support of the people of Pakistan, will defend Pakistan — its territorial integrity and sovereignty — at all costs, we mean it. And we will do it, come what may.”

However, he added, this operational preparedness, military capability and technical prowess would not be meaningful if it was not backed by the resolve and the strategic clarity of the leadership.

More to follow